4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Plasma DNA is more reliable than carcinoembryonic antigen for diagnosis of recurrent esophageal cancer

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.01.004

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Carcinoembryonic antigen-(CEA) and plasma DNA are known to be elevated in patients with esophageal cancer and are higher in patients with disseminated disease. The sensitivity and specificity of these markers in the diagnosis of recurrent esophageal cancer have not been compared. STUDY DESIGN: Plasma DNA was measured using polymerase chain reaction in 45 patients with esophageal cancer and 44 asymptomatic volunteers. The 95(th) percentile (19 ng/mL) in the volunteers was used to define normal. Thirty-nine patients had localized cancer and underwent resection, and six had disseminated disease at operation. Plasma DNA was measured preoperatively in all patients, with serum CEA measured in 31. Plasma DNA was measured sequentially during followup in 21 patients, including 7 who developed recurrence. CEA was measured in 14 of 21 patients who had sequential plasma DNA measured and in 6 of 7 patients with recurrence. CEA levels greater than 5.0 ng/mL were used as cut-off RESULTS: Plasma DNA was more sensitive than CEA for detecting unresectable esophageal cancer (100% versus 40%), but it had a lower specificity (22% versus 89%).The positive predictive value (19% versus 40%) and negative predictive value (100% versus 89%) were similar for plasma DNA and serum CEA, respectively. Plasma DNA was also more sensitive than CEA in detecting recurrent esophageal cancer (100% versus 33%). The specificity and positives predictive values were 100% for both tests, but the negative predictive values were higher for plasma DNA. Plasma DNA rose before there was clinical evidence of recurrence in 67% compared with only 17% for CEA. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated plasma DNA is an extremely reliable indicator of the presence of recurrent disease, and, in the majority of patients, it rises before clinical evidence of recurrence. In contrast, a normal CEA should be interpreted cautiously, because it does not exclude recurrent disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据